SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2003 Supreme(Ker) 484

K.S.RADHAKRISHNAN, PIUS C.KURIAKOSE
Sasi @ Sasikumar – Appellant
Versus
Saudamini – Respondent


Judgment :-

Radhakrishnan, J.

This appeal has been filed by defendants 1 and 3 and additional defendants 8 to 11 O.S.No 428 of 1997 on the file of the Sub Court, Thrissur.

2. Valuation shown in the memorandum of appeal is above Rs. 1 lakh. Total valuation is Rs 1,40,788/- and the court fee payable is Rs 12,478/- and the court fee paid is Rs 4,160/-. Registry noted various defects of which we are concerned with No.4, viz.,

"Since O.S.is for the year 1997, and valuation is below Rs 2 lakhs, please clarify how the appeal is maintainable before this court."

Advocate replied stating as follows:

"P.O.P.9/96 filed in February 1996, i.e., suit filed before March 1996. So R.F.A. is maintainable in the High Court."

Registry again reiterated the defect stating as follows:

"Suit is of the year 1997. Since the suit valuation is below Rs 2 lakhs, this appeal is not maintainable before the High Court. May be posted before court for orders."

Hence this matter has been placed before us.

3. This appeal has been preferred under Section 96 Order 41 Rule of the Code of Civil Procedure. Counsel appearing for the appellant Smt Shahna Karthikeyan submitted that the appeal is perfectly maintainable since the suit w







Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top